Yea, it's beautiful but you have to ask yourself what are these car
companies thinking? Introduce a car with 375 horsepower on premium gas at
$3.25 a gallon instead of a smaller diesel powered car that we sane people
want? I say 'sane' because there are those of you out there with the 'I can
afford it so I'm going to get it' mindset that has the rest of us sane
people forced into larger vehicles just because 'we want some protection in
case we get hit by one of the behemoths that surround us on the highways'.
Legislate and tax the big SUV's off the highways and see how quickly small
cars will proliferate. Oh how I hate yuppies!
People with too much money and no regard for anyone else aren't
yuppies, they're called idiots. The problem is the Energy Tax Act of
'79 that's your problem, not "yuppies."
- Thee Chicago Wolf
What an idiot.. I hate "nanny types" who think they know what's best for
everyone. I'll spend MY MONEY as I see fit.You want to drive a go-cart so
the government should outlaw SUV's and trucks? That's just what we
need...More nanny laws to regulate behavior..Was you born stupid or is it
something you work on daily.I can just imagin trying to haul all my tools
and materials around in a Yugo...You want to drive around with your knees on
your chest,fine go for it but leave me the hell alone....I suppose next you
will be whining that my house is to big as well and we need laws to regulate
square footage per person....Socialist moonbat.....
I guess you can't read either...I use my truck for WORK...Look it up if you
don't know what it means.....By the way ,what do you drive and how big is
your house? Public Transportation and Public Housing maybe???? I'll get rid
of my truck when Al Gore starts riding a bike and living in a Tee-Pee...LOL
You don't even see the irony in it all. I never mentioned global
warming. I am talking about rate of consumption. Big difference.
Please continue to support the Chinese and Arab economies, they're
depending on you.
- Thee Chicago Wolf
Geesh,ATLEAST use the right countries I'm supporting...Like The United
States,(we do still produce our own oil you know)Canada, Venezuela,Russia
THEN Saudi Arabia. Don't forget Korea (Elantra)...LOL..MORON...
If you would get out more, you would notice that people get what they
deserve. If they work hard and can afford nice cars, they deserve
them. If they sit around and fiddle, they deserve less. That's the way
it has always been, and the way it always will be. You don't think the
hard working people should lower their living standards so lazy asses
can have more, do you?
Wastefulness will indeed hasten the depletion of natural resources.
However, people aren't equipped to deal with that in times of plenty.
When fuel goes up to $15 a gallon, even some of the wealthier people
will be forced to cut back. The $15 fuel is closer than we think, so
all the waste is not doing as much harm as you think.
Bob, it's got nothing to do with not getting out enough. I'm a bit
insulted by your presumptuous attitude that I'm poor or something or
that I insist people lower themselves or their standards. It's beyond
a gross misinterpretation of the original argument of this post /
thread. I don't give a rat's posterior what anyone drives.
As I've said from the beginning, a law that's been abused by car
makers needs to be updated to address today's problems. Bush signed
legislation, albeit too little too late, to address this by 2020. I'm
just curious as to what loopholes exist in it, if any. There are
people who work hard (you know, three jobs, kids, mortgage, bills,
etc.) and STILL don't get ahead and it's got nothing to do with
idleness or lethargy or not working harder. Everyone's situation is
different. People who work smarter, not harder, get ahead in life.
That, Bob, is how it IS.
$15 a gallon to the uber wealthy isn't going to be a big deal but one
could only HOPE there will be an alternative to $15 gas by the time
that happens. You don't think Paris Hilton, in her 10 city, 17 highway
Bently, care is gas if $50 a gallon, do you?
I don't know that I agree with you that we're almost there. China and
India's economies haven't quite peaked yet. Gas prices THAT high, I
would imagine, would crash an economy. When a resources appears to be
plentiful, it's not an apparent problem. You HAVE to factor in double
or triple digit growth in other countries. They're going to want a
bigger and bigger part of that world oil every year as their economy
booms. People will only notice it when it's either almost gone or can
only be had by the highest bidder. The bigger picture is that it's not
just about fixing a broken law or making 35MPG the standard for a
fleet by 2020, it's also the repercussions of sending industry to
countries that are now booming exponentially as a byproduct. Exactly
how much harder CAN a person work if another country is reaping all
- Thee Chicago Wolf
We don't need any artificial laws. The only real law that should
govern MPG in cars and fuel prices is supply and demand. Let the
markets stay free. That way, the prices will always be fair, and the
vehicles will have bearable fuel economy.
You talk as though the government is responsible for the laws of
physics. Internal combustion engines have been all but tweaked to the
limit. In order to improve mileage significantly, the automobile will
have to undergo serious change. Cars will have to get smaller and a
lot lighter to significantly improve mileage. Some people won't like
the cars that result, so they will be accepted very grudgingly. Car
makers aren't in business to make the government happy. They are in
business to make their customers happy. And that's the way it should
Normally I'd agree and strongly support your position. But I'm not so sure
it works in this case.
Let's play "what if". What if the government did not mandated unleaded
fuel? What if the government did not mandate some fuel savings? Would
technology have won or would we be changing plugs at 10,000 miles because
they are lead fouled? Would cars till be 5000 pounds when a much lighter
one performs better?
Agree that the internal combustion engine is pretty close to its limits so
other types must be researched. Twenty years ago people said the internal
combustion engine was at its limit, but the automakers manage to add some
power every couple of years. Just look at the 3800 GM for instance.
Hyundai 3.3 is getting a boost. Evidently it is still possible to squeeze a
Just my opinion, but the hybrid is not the way of the future.
I'm also not so sure that the automakers actually want some of the changes
that the government forces them to charge more for and increase profits.
Public posturing aside, they do add those mandated "improvements" into the
cost of the car. "We don't want to increase prices but the government makes
us do it."
Yes, this is true. Innovations and technological tweaking continues to
squeeze more out the IC engine. Variable intake seems to be the new
big thing for 2008.
Reinforced by this fact, the 2007/2008 4-cyl Sonata not only has MORE
horsepower than my 2002 6-cyl, it get's better mileage! When my 2002
dies or I sell it off or trade in, I will be looking forward to what
4-cyl model is going to be out.
- Thee Chicago Wolf
Fair enough, but let's not get public health issues mixed up with
Physics dictates how much work a gallon of gasoline can perform. With
the old technology, we weren't too close to that. Newer engines are
actually getting pretty close. To get any *significant* MPG boosts,
we'll have to drop not hundreds, but thousands of pounds from our
current family sedans. If my 3.3L Sonata weighed 2400 instead of 3400
pounds, it could easily get 35 mpg (if geared accordingly). A little
aerodynamics, and sacrifice a little less interior room, and I bet she
gets 45mpg. It's not as much the engine as the car.
Agree! Plug-in hybrids are the way to go... until something better
I hear you. They love to stick new charges on the window sticker. :)
It's good that you see the clear reason why the legislation was
signed. I think you're a bit one-sided in your global outlook though
because you clearly illustrate only the wealthy will be able to afford
to buy gas and it will push the rest of the 99% out. The underlying
argument seems to be that the market drive everything but people in
the US with your mindset think America is the only country that
consumes oil for the production of gas for cars. You are NOT factoring
in the exponential growth occurring in other developing countries.
Blah Blah Blah, here come the big bad government always telling us
what to do and when to do it. The legislation ultimately does not to
tell US what to do, it just sets challenges to what the auto industry
already knows it has to do but will ONLY do if dragged kicking and
screaming. According to your philosophy, if left to their own devices,
the automakers would ditch all large cars and make small cars. Auto
makers have NO incentive to make small cars because they make gobs of
money from their LARGE vehicles. They will continue to focus on the
BIG money maker, not the chump change compact cars. But lately, all I
see are recalls and auto-makers going in the toilet because people
aren't buying the large cars. The large car bubble has burst from what
I can tell. At least until gas comes back down to what it was pre_Iraq
Yes, improving vehicles efficiency is a challenge. Every year, science
proves you CAN do more. You CAN push the limit a bit further. You CAN
improve upon what's already current. I am constantly reading about
grad and Ph. D. students figuring out some tweak to the engine to
improve it a bit more. Some improved engine component is made to
squeeze out a little bit more. I am very aware of the limit of the
I am just waiting for the whole outside of all cars to be made out of
plastic like bumpers back 10 years ago. The styrofoam beneath was a
nice touch too. That's always made me feel safer. The car makers will
cut any and all corners to meet that magic MPG ratio based on vehicle
size and weight. I noticed at the Chicago auto show the new "smaller"
Hummer sure looks like it's made out of a hell of a lot of plastic.
Gee, wonder why? This is the little game they have to play to
sloooooowly introduce the idea that plastic is safe for more than just
bumpers, wheel well, and quarter panels. All the plastic in the world
cannot save them though, try as they might. But it is to their benefit
you see, plastic IS, after all, a petroleum product. And the circle
goes round and round and round....
- Thee Chicago Wolf
I'm sure we're irritating the piss out of the general group who are
discussing Hyundais but whether we agree or not, I like a good debate
and discussion. It's all good.
I'm not sure where you're getting this "luxury" car thing from as I
never injected it into the conversation. I guess our definitions of
luxury cars differ? I can tell from the way you choose to word things
in terms of cars that it's partially an aesthetic choice as opposed to
practical or pragmatic. I feel most people make choices based on their
budget and their overall intended purpose. The average adult is, what,
8K in financial debt (credit or otherwise)? Most people have sense
enough to stick within their economic means.
Now, the 99% I am talking about is the "99%" that was referred to in
the discussion about "the wealthiest 1% of American's have more wealth
than the combined 99% of all Americans." THOSE 99%. Not the 99%, as in
"everybody else." I didn't make that clear. I was still following on
the tail end of the earlier discussions of those wealthy enough to
afford $15 gas prices from a few posts ago that would put gas out of
the reach of the rest of the "99%." That should be more on target with
what I really mean. Clear as mud?
Ok, I got you on this one. A few months back there was heated debate
on this exact same topic on this exact same car. Someone attempted,
and failed, to tell me gas today had never been as high, even adjusted
for inflation. I am old enough to remember the Arab Oil Embargo of the
early 70s (1973 to be exact,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1973_oil_crisis ) and that gas, adjusted
for inflation, topped our highest per-barrel costs in recent months.
The Energy Tax Act came about as a direct result of that
The car makers scrambling to make smaller cars was, in my
interpretation, a result of the Arab Oil Embargo and the economic
climate of the time. While it did take nearly 6 years for the Energy
Tax Act to be signed into law (1978) after gas prices went nuts in
the late 70s and early 80s, it at least set the precedent that car
makers WERE willing to work with the government to find a
middle-ground solution for both the oil side and the economic side of
the problem. Today, I feel you have to hold a gun to their head.
Sanatayana said it best: "Those who don't learn from history are
doomed to repeat it."
I kind of see the legislation that Bush signed as a bit of prodding
being done against the car makers. Back in the 70s, I don't feel they
needed to be prodded. They saw what needed to be done and stepped up
to the challenge.
Well, it's funny you mention sacrifice. This is exactly what someone
was talking about on NPR as I carpooled with my wife this morning.
Just 1 generation ago, people knew what it meant to sacrifice a little
both for themselves and their country. I don't see that so much now.
At least not in the generation growing up. In terms of sacrifice, can
you imagine if people had to ration rubber and metal like they did
during the early World Wars? Our senior citizens who had to deal with
this type of situation would be laughing at how much a bunch of
Sally's people have become.
Using science to created stronger alloys and make better use of metals
in car could yield some weight reductions. Ultimately it all does fall
on the shoulder of the engine and it's power. We're also seeing a lot
of new technology being put into cars now that wasn't there 10 years
ago: Nav systems, full cabin air bags, multi speaker arrays, DVD
players and screens, etc. That stuff adds to the aggregate weight.
It's starting to become standard on some models. 5 years from now, who
Hey, I'll take the 2 more miles to the gallon from tweaking if the
technology tweak stays in the design. For someone who might be buying
their first new car and expect it to last them a good 5-10 years with
good maintenance, the 2 mile per gallon savings could sure add up over
the long term and afford them a better vehicle down the road.
Nerf car? Better patent the name before Toyota does! You might retire
on the royalties or something. Yes, it will be interesting to see what
will be on the roads in 2025. The trend to use plastics on bumpers is
probably to increase aero dynamism I would surmise. I can't imagine it
being easy to make a metal cast of the crazy bumper designs we see
today. It MUST be easier to cast it in plastic. I hope the automakers
do rise to the challenge. Hopefully recruit some young minds coming
out of school to put their minds to work on the problem. Cheers.
- Thee Chicago Wolf
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.